W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > April 2009

Re: ISSUE-35 RDFinXHTML-35 (also ACTION-240)

From: Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>
Date: Tue, 21 Apr 2009 11:09:15 +0300
Message-Id: <3296BFB2-72B7-44FA-8E04-EF62966646A4@iki.fi>
To: www-tag@w3.org
A couple of related observations:

1) The RDFa spec says:
> Note that it is generally considered a good idea not to use relative  
> paths in namespace declarations, but since it is possible that an  
> author may ignore this guidance, it is further possible that the URI  
> obtained from a CURIE is relative. However, since all URIs must be  
> resolved relative to [base] before being used to create triples, the  
> use of relative paths should not have any effect on processing.
http://www.w3.org/TR/rdfa-syntax/#s_convertingcurietouri

This seems to be in conflict with XML architecture where the values of  
xmlns:foo are opaque strings that are absolute URIs by convention.

2) The CURIE spec itself doesn't appear to define CURIE processing-- 
just syntax.

3) OWL rejected CURIEs. The reasons are explained at
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-html-editor/2009AprJun/0009.html

-- 
Henri Sivonen
hsivonen@iki.fi
http://hsivonen.iki.fi/
Received on Tuesday, 21 April 2009 08:10:09 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 26 April 2012 12:48:13 GMT